Accuracy assessment of an imaging technique to examine ulnohumeral joint congruency during elbow flexion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A CT-based imaging technique to investigate ulnohumeral joint congruency of elbows undergoing physiologic flexion is introduced. This technique, which employed landmark registration and a previously developed inter-bone distance algorithm, was validated experimentally. Results obtained with this imaging technique were validated in a single specimen by comparing the resulting joint congruency maps to results obtained with experimental casting in a static position. Additionally, the accuracy of the registration technique was assessed in four specimens using fiducial and target registration error to evaluate the positional and angular accuracy. Preliminary data from an intact cadaveric elbow was shown to demonstrate the utility of this technique. The overall accuracy of the registration was better than 1 mm, and the congruency maps showed excellent correspondence with the casting, validating the use of a CT-based imaging technique to examine the congruency of joints undergoing quasi-static flexion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it